CubinNY

There isn't enough talent in any of those rosters either badumbum I'm here all week folks. Don't for get to tip you waitress.

Does he think hes writing an article for a video game audience? Seriously, that might be the most [expletive] trade proposal that has been published...thats quite an accomplishment. It's worse than some of the most ridiculous trade proposals that posters on ESPN.com and Cubs.com would propose. But what do we know, we've never been in a big league locker room while everyone played grabass and poker.

Good for Listach. I know this is anecdotal and that a lot of the players moved up and/or down, but I could see a noticeable difference in the Smokies from the previous years to last year in terms of being ready to play.

Very masturbatory.

from missionary to doggie. EDIT: curse you BeerHere.

I'd settle for a 1 year contract. The new owner shouldn't be saddled with a drunken sailor on shore leave. Hendry has spent an incredible sum of money to "stay competitive within division".

If listening to Brenly is any indication, he does not show any evidence of it. He's all about manufacturing runs and playing the game the right way.

Philly is a fine city. A passionate city, but a fine one. It's a good beer town.

Park factors are among the most overrated "stats" among statheads. Non-statheads don't even think about them. The use of statistical formulas in this regard is to normalize the data so that someone can make a judgment between two or more players that play in different environments. However, the SD for park factors is so small that most of the time the data have very little meaning. Outside of places like old Coors (before the humidor) and Petco/Comerica most places play relatively similar. The question that's important is, does player A perform better in park 1 than he would in park 2? A guy like Slappy was able to take advantage of Coors and Pro-Player because they had huge outfields. He really is/was a better player when he played in Coors b/c the park suited his abilities. A guy who drives the ball in the gaps isn't going to be as good in Pro-Player as he would in a more symmetrical park. A guy like Hamilton who mashes the snot out of the ball will still mash the snot out of the ball anywhere he plays. So that means he's very likely to play well in a hitter friendly environment and play well in a pitcher friendly environment. All and all I would just look at OPS+ to try to determine offensive output when comparing players. Thanks, but I get all that. My question is how (or why) does a place like Rangers Ballpark go from 5th to 19th to 1st in park factor in a 3-year span. If you don't change the structure (or something like a humidor) how can the same park be hitter friendly, pitcher friendly, than the most hitter friendly place in 3 consecutive years. B/c they use runs scored as the primary dependent variable.

I'm rooting for a sweep. Let's get this season over and get started on the hot stove league. I'm not a big football, basketball, or hockey fan so this is it.

Park factors are among the most overrated "stats" among statheads. Non-statheads don't even think about them. The use of statistical formulas in this regard is to normalize the data so that someone can make a judgment between two or more players that play in different environments. However, the SD for park factors is so small that most of the time the data have very little meaning. Outside of places like old Coors (before the humidor) and Petco/Comerica most places play relatively similar. The question that's important is, does player A perform better in park 1 than he would in park 2? A guy like Slappy was able to take advantage of Coors and Pro-Player because they had huge outfields. He really is/was a better player when he played in Coors b/c the park suited his abilities. A guy who drives the ball in the gaps isn't going to be as good in Pro-Player as he would in a more symmetrical park. A guy like Hamilton who mashes the snot out of the ball will still mash the snot out of the ball anywhere he plays. So that means he's very likely to play well in a hitter friendly environment and play well in a pitcher friendly environment. All and all I would just look at OPS+ to try to determine offensive output when comparing players.

Hermedia.

Good God... Many Jets fans started walking upright only a few short years ago. If gonny sees the dude in the fireman's hat I hope he clocks him one.

Sciambi. I didn't know Sciambi did color with Len. That had to be incredible. Boog is even better than Len. The Marlins media guide says Len was on TV and Boog was on radio, but I could swear i heard them do innings together on the radio when I lived in MIami. I could be wrong.

I'd like to see him teamed up with Boog Somby (sp?). They were great when they did the Marlins games.

No.

That's the best Cub news I've heard in a long time. A) he's out of the booth. B) he's managing a division rival.

The is like This is Spinal Tap and you're all the band and I'm Tommy Pischedda

He's from Northwestern Indiana and grew up a Cubs fan. I pretty much guarantee he's not accepting a trade to the Padres. I'm pretty sure he was a White Sox fan. But baseball is a business. I'm a Cubs fan if I could get more money playing for another team you bet your ass I'm gone. Nevertheless, I basically understand what people are saying here.

Why would Samardjiza not want to get traded? Why do people think that a NTC means a player can't be traded? Maybe he wants to be a starter and the Cubs tell him he won't be starting for the Cubs. I don't know I could come up with many reasons why he would agree to a trade. Doesn't a NTC only mean that the GM has to get permission?

Why can't you take into account where a guy plays his home games? Because the player had nothing to do with his surroundings. It's not like Wrigley is a great hitters park.

Yes. It is not just my estimation though. I guess that's the debate. It's a meta-debate. Why would people not think Santo is worthy for the HOF. There are the arguments I've heard: 1. No WS victories 2. O_O's one 3. People didn't like him 4. Billy Williams, Fergie Jenkins, and Ernie Banks are already in. That's it. If one goes by the standards by which players are judged, he's in. He's not border line.

Why not? I love playing devil's advocate. It causes you to step out of your bias and look at things from a different perspective. Sometimes there are two sides and sometimes there are not two sides. The only debate would be is if Santo was the best 3rd baseman of his era or the 2nd best. Either way, he deserves to be in the HOF.

New Yorkers hate Soriano. Mets fans hate him because he was a Yankee and Yankee fans think (rightly so?) that he's a chocker at crunch time. There is no way I could see Soriano being traded to the Mets. The Cubs are stuck with Soriano for a long time. We better get use to him.

I've never heard of Santo being a jerk when he played. That's interesting, can you enlighten me? If you read the whole article, he brings up the point of win shares of the 1960s. This is what he said about the win shares: I'm just playing devil's advocate here though. That article is probably the most convincing I've read as to why he shouldn't be in the HOF, but not nearly enough to change my mind. From what my dad told me he was a talker on the field and smart alec to the sports writers. I don't think other teams cared too much for the heal clicks either. It was a different time. Players on the other team didn't talk to one another and the game still had a little of the old intensity to it (spikes up slides, brain balls, etc.).